Does the NRA exaggerate for political reasons?

If we listened just to the NRA publicity machine (echoed uncritically by the general media), you would think the NRA is growing by leaps and bounds and will soon take over the country.

However, there is evidence that the NRA is distorting the picture. Shocking, I know!

Take a look at a few of these facts--based on legitimate polls--VALID NONPOLITICAL POLLS ON SOCIAL POLICY--though the NRA types claim any poll that doesn't support the NRA "just say NO" policy to ALL gun control (NRA is now backing off from their tepid approval of gun-checks at all sales at gun shows because the gun control people are seriously proposing such gun-checks!) is by definition a skewed poll. You know, the NRA is always TRUTH--so anything that questions their TRUTH is obviously FALSE. Yeah, sure.

Snippet:
Gun ownership has fallen sharply from 54 percent of U.S. households in 1977 to 32 percent in 2011, according to the University of Chicago's General Social Survey.

Just focus on that fact for a minute. Gun ownership has fallen from slightly over 50% to less than ONE-THIRD in 2011 (latest date for available figures).

The article goes on to say:
"It's in the NRA's interest to show that although gun ownership is decreasing, their membership is rising. They can't in any way be interpreted as a fading movement in a political context," Sugarmann [executive director of the Violence Policy Center, a gun-control group] said.

The NRA did not respond to several requests for comment.

Hmmm--no comment. Wonder why?
Here are a few other interesting tidbits that might shed a different light on the whole issue.

Only the NRA knows how many private clubs require NRA membership, but gun owners who object to the organization's ties to conservative politics say it can be difficult to find a place to shoot that doesn't require membership in the gun group.

"It's this sort of self-fulfilling thing where the NRA continually gets money from people who would rather not give it to them, because it's the only game in town," said Mark Roberts, president of the Liberal Gun Club, a left-leaning gun owners group.

Turns out there are all sorts of financial advantages and incentives if a club goes 100% NRA, so these clubs recruit like crazy for the NRA--because they need those financial rewards to keep on functioning. Thus if a local person likes to shoot skeet occasionally and there is only one club in the area and that club REQUIRES NRA membership, that person becomes counted as a new statistic of someone who supports NRA "just say NO" policy--even if that person disapproves of NRA policy. (See the linked article for details.)

I don't doubt that there has been some increase in NRA membership since the Newtown massacre of the innocents--(there always is a paranoid increase after a tragedy--due to fear that guns will be banned, so stock up while you can!)--but if gun ownership is dramatically falling in the larger tragectory (1977 to the present), that speaks for itself! All the more reason for the NRA to work hard on creating a false impression that the NRA and guns are taking over America, when in fact, they are not. Their motto is carry a big "stick" (gun) and make a lot of noise so that they sound larger than they really are.

And add to that all the BIG MONEY from the GUN INDUSTRY backing the NRA--to increase the their PROFITS!

Ok--here come the slings and arrows of wrath directed at me for daring to state the TRUTH. Everybody duck--todays "slings and arrows" are much more lethal!

And the great cob has illiterately spoken again. Sorta like the great oz. Full of hot air.

Fact: in every instance which a gun in a home is shot in self defense,there are seven criminal assaults or homicides, four accidental shootings, and eleven attempted or successful suicides. . Suck on those statistics , cob.

Wrong, cob. A valid poll (and there are ways of measuring the validity of a poll) is NOT based on opinion--unless you mean that it factually measures what percentage of Americans hold a certain opinion about a specific issue like gun control.

I know it consoles you to believe that all polls are invalid, but that is a generality based on ignorance. You obviously do not understand how a valid poll collects and analyzes information--so that it will be accepted by educated people (who understand polls) as valid.

Waiting for Bill to come along and tell us the poll cannot be valid because he doesn't believe it. Well, kinda like cob did if one is able to decipher the words cob typed. But I'm sure Bill will emphatically state that the poll is BS because...he says so. Maybe he'll even insult the pollsters, or maybe even Kate for posting the poll.

Thanks, Kate, for pointing this out. It's too bad the conservatives on HT cannot accept the truth. We might be able to actually have a conversation if they did.

Sure they do. Thats why one should research before getting to worked up. Its especially common amongst anti gun types. Just look at whats posted here, then go from there. Ive never seen so much outright mis onformation anywhere, cept maybe CBS, NBC, and other msm.

Well, the longer Wayne LaPierre is in the spotlight with his body guards and ideas on the Mad Max world we live in, where 'semi-automatic technology' is the only thing that can save the women and children, the more and more people realize what kind of uncompromising, dangerous kook he is.

To answer the question posed in the subject posting, of course they do. They are a business, in it to make money. Business does what it takes to increase profits. Every mass slaughter is a boon to their business of selling fear, and every mass slaughter is a boon to their bottom line.

2012 was a very, very good year.

I wonder what kind of big, bountiful bonuses LaPierre and the other top CEOs of that company enjoyed?

Only the NRA knows how many private clubs require NRA membership, but gun owners who object to the organization's ties to conservative politics say it can be difficult to find a place to shoot that doesn't require membership in the gun group.

How true it is. We had one of those gun clubs in town. Lots of skeet shooting went on their. Everyone was happy.

Then the original owners retired, sold the club to some guy who thought he was "Mr Cool". Had to have all new kinds of rules. Starting with "No NRA member, no gun club member. No NRA member, no way to skeet shoot at the gun club."

This new owner "Mr Cool", may have thought he was smart, but he really was pretty stupid. His brilliant idea, with all it's advantages, wasn't such a brilliant idea for a business right smack in the middle of a 95% liberal Democratic town.

He turned around and within 6 weeks of owning the gun club and starting his new NRA required rules, he had no members in his club. Yup, no members, no one coming, no one interested.

"Mr Cool", well he refused to change his rules, refused to give into the demands of his customers and he was out of business within 6 months. Sold the home he bought in town, sold the business to a "sane new owner", and presto, everyone came back to the club.

Oh, several other gun clubs in the area tried the same thing that "Mr Cool" did, and they all lost out too. They either lost the businesses or ended their stupid requirement.

Sure looks like these NRA members are not the "brightest bulb in the box". Sure as heck can't run a business either, except into the ground and out of business.
Can't seem to figure out that a business is only as good as the customers it has, and if it's policies turn the customers away so that you have none, then there is something wrong with the business, with the owner/s, with the policies.

Guess these NRA members don't care about that. All the better in my opinion.

Of course they do. Just like the rest of corporate America and unions.

I'm wasting time on TV this week. I'm ashamed of it too.

Watching the Netflix Original "House of Cards".

If you feel like getting in on the dirty politics, watch it.

Maybe this will entice you.

Francis "Frank" Underwood (Kevin Spacey) is an ambitious Democratic congressman and the House Majority Whip. Underwood helped ensure the election of President Garrett Walker (Michael Gill), who promised to appoint Underwood as Secretary of State. However, before Walker is sworn in, Chief of Staff Linda Vasquez (Sakina Jaffrey) announces that the president will not honor the agreement and will instead nominate Senator Michael Kern. Furious at Walker's betrayal, Underwood and his wife Claire (Robin Wright), an environmental activist, make a pact to destroy Kern.

I dont think any gun clubs around here require NRA membership? They of course suggest it as the NRA gives lots of money to the shooting sports to make upgrades in safety and equipment.NRA sponsers our air gun team which is regionly recognized.

Of course we all know that NRA is NOT a for profit organization yet anti gun types like to lie. They were audited by the Clinton administration in an attempt to do them harm. Amnd, ta da, everything was in order, there were no laws or rules found broken. So, continue another lie if it jerks yer trigger!

Several places we used to live, also red states, required NRA membership for gun clubs which offered great shooting ranges. Husband has always despised NRA and LaPierre so he and his buddies just went to out of the way abandoned dumps and gravel pits, set themselves up and did target shooting for site fixing. Tons of people did back then. He isnt so interested anymore since he became a huge fan of archery which has been his main focus for over a decade, I dont know if that would still be allowed anymore.

Amazingly, actually not really, the poll or the site using the poll do not give the statistics of how this poll was created.

Amazingly, you're wrong. The survey methodology is described in excruciating detail.
-----------------------------------------------
No, you are changing the fact to fit your rhetoric.

Where on the poll or the Policy Centers site doe it say, that this poll was determined by 2,044 people located in....?

I did not say the GSS site does or does not say x, y or z, I said the poll or site using the poll.
Get those reading glasses.

So those 2,044 people represent all three hundred million plus--Brilliant!

RESPONSE PUNCH YEAR

2010----- ALL YEARS

New England--------- 76--- 2562Middle Atlantic-----262--- 8213
East North Central--357--- 10242
West North Central--117--- 4094
South Atlantic------438--- 10554
East South Central--130--- 3637
West South Central--219--- 5172
Mountain------------144--- 3275
Pacific-------------301--- 7338

Yes, RpR, a good pollster can extrapolate with amazing accuracy from a poll group of a thousand or two and predict how a large group will behave , based on that poll group.

That is what Nate Silver's pollsters did in connection with President Obama's recent win. Of course, to do this accurately, you have to follow a stringent set of guidelines for how to select a representative sample to poll, and you have to go through some complicated procedures to some up with fair questions that can double-check on how consistent the polled sample's answers are, etc.

In other words, a good poll takes a good deal of knowledge and time to prepare--so that it will be a valid poll.

That kind of poll is NOT like some casual survey a group takes, with no idea how accurate the results are or are not. It is not some unscientific phone-in contest which yields the most unreliable information of all--if you are trying to determine how the general populace out there is responding.

Those who think it is impossible for an experienced, professional, scientific pollster to predict general trends based on a selective and sometimes rather small sample are just simply revealing their ignorance about how polling is done or on how to tell if one poll is more reliable than another.

Kate, you are being excruciatingly kind to yon trollship about that poll. I read through the methodology and found pretty normal standards and caveats. Seems to have been weighted in favor of populations with gun cultures.

He isn't selling, wouldn't dream of it, he worked a second job to get several of them because he always wanted top drawer for the time in hunting rifles.

I don't pretend to understand why, but they are his possessions to just look at if that is what makes him happy.

The only one he ever sold was a Browning collectors edition he bought in the 70's with exquisite carving on the stock and detailed etching on the barrel. He loved it but bought it strictly as an investment - sold it 15 years ago for way more than quadrupled what he paid for it and bought something else he badly wanted - never looked back, he was very happy. He never liked the idea of owning a rifle he wouldn't fire due to resale value.
I have to admit, for a rifle it was a lovely piece.

Amazingly, actually not really, the poll or the site using the poll do not give the statistics of how this poll was created.

Amazingly, you're wrong. The survey methodology is described in excruciating detail.
-----------------------------------------------
No, you are changing the fact to fit your rhetoric.

Where on the poll or the Policy Centers site doe it say, that this poll was determined by 2,044 people located in....?

I did not say the GSS site does or does not say x, y or z, I said the poll or site using the poll.

The poll clearly states that it is from the GSS, and the GSS provides the detailed methodology document to which I linked. I'm amazed that you couldn't find it; it took me about three minutes.

So those 2,044 people represent all three hundred million plus--Brilliant!

You'll want to brush up on your sampling theory. For large populations it is the absolute size of the sample that determines the accuracy of the survey, not the relative size of the sample vs. the population. A survey of 1067 randomly-chosen representatives from a population (N) of 50,000,000 has the same 95% confidence interval of +/-3% as does a survey of 1067 people from an N of a billion; one way to show this is to see how the Finite Population Correction tends to 1 as the ratio of N to n approaches infinity in the FPC formula square root((N - n)/(N - 1)); you can compute the needed sample size that attains that 95% confidence interval of +/-3% yourself by solving for n in the equation 0.98/(square root (n)).

I suggest you consult a statistics text if you are interested in learning more about this area of mathematics.

Thats cool mylab, but I think yer tryin to pull my leg, eh! It aint my first rodeo!! but thats OK.
I dont mess with Brownings. I look for pre Garcia Sako deluxe + and German weatherby's. lots of ol goodies trip my triggers but Jap brownings just dont. Heck, I shoot all my collectables, they have no value if they dont work!

Posted by Factotem
"I suggest you consult a statistics text if you are interested in learning more about this area of mathematics."---------------Wow, did you go to school with Carl Rove, that is the same attitude he had about his numbers during the past several elections.

Posted by Factotem
"I suggest you consult a statistics text if you are interested in learning more about this area of mathematics."---------------Wow, did you go to school with Carl Rove, that is the same attitude he had about his numbers during the past several elections.

I hope you learned something about the theory behind surveys. Going forward, it should help you avoid embarrassing statements like "so those 2,044 people represent all three hundred million plus--Brilliant!"

Ff, if you think Im pulling your leg, I have to wonder exactly what kind of limited and local rodeos have you been attending all these years? Not everyone, certainly not all gun owners, nor most Americans walk arelock step with your ideas

"I hope you learned something about the theory behind surveys. Going forward, it should help you avoid embarrassing statements like "so those 2,044 people represent all three hundred million plus--Brilliant!"

Do you believe in mathematics?"---------If it embarrassed you such is life.

the branch of mathematics devoted to the mathematical methods for the systematization, analysis, and use of statistical data for the drawing of scientific and practical inferences.
---------------
mathematics

1. (Mathematics) (functioning as singular) a group of related sciences, including algebra, geometry, and calculus, concerned with the study of number, quantity, shape, and space and their interrelationships by using a specialized notation

RpR--Rove's problem was that he selected polls he WISHED would be true. As the election approached, liberals kept on warning conservatives that they were relying on the wrong polls, but the conservatives (Rove included) refused to listen because they so badly wanted the invalid polls to be correct--since that would mean Romney would win.

When such people are so heavily into wish fulfillment (and out of contact with reality), they lose the ability to judge the validity of a poll. They see only that which they hope and want to be true.

Dang Marshall, yes I do! Funny you'd make that correlation, tonite especially!!.
I truly love guns. I appreciate their everything. I truly fondle a Good ol gun thats been made by a master. I used to loathe these modern rifles but have grown to truly appreciate what they are. They are the perfect huntingrifle, they excell at marksmanship. I just cant see them as assault wqeapons, mostly because they arent that.

Sure I get it. My gig was buyimng 10 Ruger SA revolvers and customizing them, to the extreme. Ive got guns which are one of a kind, others which are so raRE THERE ARE 3 IN THE WORLD. I mess with investment quality stuff. I KNOW guns. Ive been on the sidelines for a few years but I am back now. I like to play with quality, not every day bang bangs.For the record, I deal internaionally, well, sometimes. But I do have a fetish for the good stuff.

Posted by Factotem
"I hope you learned something about the theory behind surveys. Going forward, it should help you avoid embarrassing statements like "so those 2,044 people represent all three hundred million plus--Brilliant!"

Do you believe in mathematics?"---------If it embarrassed you such is life.

the branch of mathematics devoted to the mathematical methods for the systematization, analysis, and use of statistical data for the drawing of scientific and practical inferences.

Um, when there's a listing like that in a reference work, with two words separated by a comma, the second word is a modifier of the first, so if you want to write the entire term without the comma, you put the modifier first: "Mathematical Statistics". Kinda like when you write your name "Funderberg, Donny"; the first name comes second, but you wouldn't say, "have you met my friend Funderberg Donny?"

So anyway, you didn't answer the question: Do you believe in mathematics? To follow on in advance, do you believe in the branch of mathematics called statistics? Do you believe in probability? Do you believe, for example, that one could create a system for winning at roulette with a fair wheel?

So anyway, you didn't answer the question: Do you believe in mathematics? To follow on in advance, do you believe in the branch of mathematics called statistics? Do you believe in probability? Do you believe, for example, that one could create a system for winning at roulette with a fair wheel?--------------YES, I did forget the comma in my sentence, so you are correct.

Posted by Factotem
So anyway, you didn't answer the question: Do you believe in mathematics? To follow on in advance, do you believe in the branch of mathematics called statistics? Do you believe in probability? Do you believe, for example, that one could create a system for winning at roulette with a fair wheel?--------------YES, I did forget the comma in my sentence, so you are correct.

No, your own answers to my questions. What outcome so frightens you that you are fearful of expressing your position on these issues? They are simple questions. Do you believe in mathematics? To follow on in advance, do you believe in statistics? Do you believe in probability? Do you believe, for example, that one could create a system for winning at roulette with a fair wheel?